A Surge of Support for War in Republican Debate

[bigtree]

In last night's GOP debates, the party's presidential candidates outstripped President Bush in their enthusiasm for the surge.


President Bush has regularly been criticized for presenting a rose-colored view of events in Iraq. But compared to some of the candidates running to succeed him, he looks like a downright pessimist.

Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney and Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) made last night's Republican presidential debate a contest in who could be more unequivocal in declaring victory for the president's "surge" in Iraq, with each of them going further even than Bush. During his visit to Iraq this week, Bush was careful to tout what he saw as "progress" and "some security success" while also stressing what has not succeeded. No such nuance on stage last night.

A day after the Governmental Accountability Office reported that only three of 18 political and security benchmarks have been met, Romney declared flatly that "the surge is apparently working" with no mention of unfulfilled goals. He quickly added the caveat that Gen. David H. Petraeus has not yet delivered his assessment to Congress, but then said that "if the surge is working, then we're going to be able to start bringing back our troop levels, slowly but surely, and play more of a support role over time." Just in case the message was cloudy, he added one more time, "The surge has worked."

more: http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2007/09/06/a_surge_of_support_for_war_in.html


my take:

If You Liked the Past Half-Decade of Bush's Blundering Militarism . . .
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=1746777&mesg_id=1746777